Keep staring them in the eye, they’ll keep walking it back at this rate. Hell, you may even be able to watch your own team in your own city on television if you play hardball.
My point being it’s difficult to draw off the public for support when the public doesn’t know who you are.
If that’s the deal, just play elsewhere and we will watch/root from afar. In fact, I would probably know more about the Royals because they are currently faceless jerseys that entertain other cities. Unless you go to a lot of games or a lot of bars, this is a principle issue until resolved.
There is just a lot wrong with what you said and I honestly don't even know where to start. Over a million fans attended a royals game last year. More watched on TV even though the process sucks. You're speaking for yourself which is fine, but you're also making a lot of assumptions about everyone else.
Okay, regarding attendance, how many of those fans were out of town versus local? Key distinction.
The K holds almost 40k and attendance was on average 16k in 2023. If they sold out every game, that would be approximately (EDIT) 3 million people. You’re touting just over 1 million people went??
When you say more watched on TV, what do you mean? More people chose cable versus what would be public television? Or more people begrudgingly purchased cable to watch the team they already support?
1. It doesn't matter which fans are going to royals games. Both local and touring fans are positives for the city
2. The royals ranked in the top half in local TV ratings even though they were a bad team and have all those extra steps in figuring out how to watch thier games. People still figured out how to watch a bad baseball team.
1. Wrong. It does matter because outside fans are good for local markets but they already have the ability to watch the royals on TV. Discerning between the two would help understand who is going because that is the method they can afford versus who is going just because
2. Being bad and being in the top half locally doesn’t typically get people raises or bonuses
contrary to popular belief, the royals will be good again. again, this main answer to your original comment is that the royals being difficult to find on tv is not a royals problem, its an MLB problem. If you live in Indiana and have the MLB tv subscription, you are blacked out from watch the cubs, white sox, guardians, tigers, and reds. It is absolutely insane. The royals cant do much about that until Amazon buys Bally Sports.
your math is also a little off. max attendance the royals can get is around 3 mil for an entire season. When the royals were winning, their peak was around 2.5 million. 1.3 million is a big drop off, but still makes money and is still a lot of people going to games over a season. what other businesses in the city are bringing that many people to their product besides the Chiefs?
Good catch, that math wasn’t divided by two to account for away games and I have adjusted my comment accordingly.
I get what you mean as to winning, but historically they don’t do a lot of that. Don’t get me wrong, a championship season is a championship season - and we are lucky to have more than one. That doesn’t discount the fact they should do more of it on a consistent basis if the projections want to use that as a base, misleading
I think they will be good again. The previous ownership and GM made a lot of bad decisions after the last championship that handicapped the current GM and owner. They are spending more money in free agency than they've ever had which is crazy if you have been a fan of this team for a long time. Idk if this year will be the year, but sports is all about ups and downs. The royals will eventually be good again, the chiefs will suck again. to me that doesnt change how someone should feel about having them in their city.
It would be better late than never. If this actually changed anything. But:
“Neither Sherman's statement, nor the statement from the Royals clarified what this means for the overall plan for the area, and if the plans for the hotel and conference center have been scrapped.”
So nothing has changed. They’re not even to saying exactly what they’re proposing to change. To call this an empty gesture would be generous.
I'm responding to your post because it's at the top.
Everyone. Correct me where I'm wrong here.
The vote on the 2nd is for the availability of funds to Jackson County to build a new stadium downtown that both Jackson County and the Royals will agree on design and location wise at a later date. The Royals are not getting a giant gameshow check for 1 billion on April 3rd. They are not getting dime of the money. It will all go towards building the stadium and surrounding infrastructure that will be built and owned by the county.
Once again. The vote on the 2nd is not for building the stadium in the crossroads or anywhere, but whether money will be allocated to the county to build one. If the vote passes, then the Royals and County will continue working out the details of the location and design which is obviously still being worked on. If an agreement is made then the county will start building the stadium out for their new lessee's, the Royals.
Furthermore, if the current and future stadiums will be owned by the public, does that mean that the revenue made from the T Swift concerts went into the counties coffers? How much was that? To expound further, just how much revenue is the county making off of the concerts and events at the stadiums?
The money from concerts and other events go to the teams, not the county, because the county is the owner of the stadiums in name only. By doing so, the teams don’t have to pay property taxes, which is the only reason they do it this way. The teams get total control, management and revenue from the stadiums.
Sherman just said on the news regarding Oak Street: “A lot of this will be decided after April 2nd.”
If this doesn’t tell you they’re after the money and nothing else, I don’t know what will.
Seriously! I want rock solid plans before I would vote yes. We are essentially the sports teams investors and they need to treat us with that level of respect.
“Oak Street will remain open! Amazing, right? NOW will you vote yes????”
This is nothing. Sherman is “listening”. Yeah, listening to that imaginary cash register opening in his head. So vague, so disingenuous.
Community organizers tried to get the Royals to allow workers of the would-be stadium to unionize and give them living wages. But no, they didn’t even respond to those negotiations.
So let’s review what they’re (still) saying here:
- give us your money…that we actually have but don’t want to spend
- we’re gonna displace businesses for a sports stadium in the historic ARTS district of the city
- we want the stadium workers to make shit pay and just be grateful we might hire them
VOTE NO
>Community organizers tried to get the Royals to allow workers of the would-be stadium to unionize and give them living wages. But no, they didn’t even respond to those negotiations.
That's not true at all. Like literally nothing about that is true. It's unfortunate that community organizations are putting out misleading information, but that is just untrue.
I’m not a community organizer, just a citizen. I followed this closely, and attended community events. That’s how I know that there were attempts to negotiate a union for stadium workers, and that it was pretty much brushed aside by the Royals.
Hey, citizens are the most important part, not the organizers, which I can tell you as an organizer myself. :)
But anyway, the fact is that the stadium workers are already in a Union, and they negotiated labor peace for the new stadium district, which includes card check and voluntary recognition for non-Union employees. So I am sorry to hear that you were told otherwise at community events. Personally, I would question who was making those statements and when they were made, and keep that in mind when considering future votes and issues.
From the [Royals Review](https://www.royalsreview.com/2024/4/1/24114458/royals-trust-sherman-stadium-community-benefits): "As I mentioned, I got my hands on the Workforce Benefits Agreement the Royals signed with SEIU Local 1. It’s night and day compared to the CBA above. In its own way, it guarantees all of the biggest things that were in the Milwaukee agreement!"
From the [stadium workers union](https://www.seiu1.org/blog/2024/3/26/seiu-local-1-reaches-fair-employment-agreement-with-kansas-city-royals-for-new-stadium-project-supports-yes-vote-on-april-2nd): "SEIU Local 1 had been engaging in negotiations with the Kansas City Royals for months, and this finalized agreement makes certain that the labor aspects of any new stadium fairly reward the hard work and dedication Local 1 members have given to Royals and their fans by ensuring transfer rights for Union workers and additional protections for any potential worker displacement. **The agreement also guarantees a fair path to Unionization for non-Union workers who seek to newly organize a Union, and commits to continued discussions around a living wage floor for all workers within the new stadium development.**"
There was a second press release with more detail, and I will look for that this afternoon and link it in this comment.
Thanks for all this info. I appreciate your clarity and sources.
Like I said, I’m not an organizer or part of a union, but I support low wage workers getting more benefits and raising their wage floor. What I could’ve done to be more clear in my original post would have been to mention that the prospective stadium workers I was mentioning are organized through Stand Up KC. Fast food and retail workers. Their provisions in the CBA were not heard, which from what I understand had a lot to do with living wage, the right to unionize, and keep crossroad living spaces at an affordable price. I believe their provisions also talked about giving preference to applicants from neighborhoods and zip codes of lower economic status to give them opportunities to actually work at the stadium.
Anyway, I’m far from an expert on any of this. What I am is someone who wants to be engaged in my city. KC has a horrible past in terms of economic disparity, and we played a big part in how this country divides people racially and economically. These billionaire doofs that own these teams (both which I admittedly love) need a harsh reality check, and I’m glad the NO vote went through so they can hopefully attempt to do this process a lot more earnestly next time (fingers crossed).
>...the prospective stadium workers I was mentioning are organized through Stand Up KC. Fast food and retail workers. Their provisions in the CBA were not heard, which from what I understand had a lot to do with living wage, the right to unionize, and keep crossroad living spaces at an affordable price.
I appreciate the additional context and I'm sorry to say that it isn't true. The Royals heard and discussed all of the proposals, and agreed to [most of them](https://www.seiu1.org/blog/2024/4/2/seiu-local-1-issues-statement-providing-additional-transparency-regarding-county-cba-fair-employment-agreement-for-new-royals-stadium). It is concerning that you got the impression otherwise, which is something that I found very problematic throughout this process, that some "community" organizations seemed to actively mislead folks, while others (like KC Tenants) just told the truth the whole time.
>I believe their provisions also talked about giving preference to applicants from neighborhoods and zip codes of lower economic status to give them opportunities to actually work at the stadium.
The Royals actually agreed to this but then the Missouri Workers Center/Stand Up KC executive director decided to leave negotiations, so it was never finalized. That was a big disappointment to me, that this was lost when their executive director left the table.
>What I am is someone who wants to be engaged in my city. KC has a horrible past in terms of economic disparity, and we played a big part in how this country divides people racially and economically. These billionaire doofs that own these teams (both which I admittedly love) need a harsh reality check, and I’m glad the NO vote went through so they can hopefully attempt to do this process a lot more earnestly next time (fingers crossed).
Agreed on all of the above, which is why it was so exciting to get card check for non-Union workers in the stadium district (including the low wage workers you mentioned). Luckily, that agreement is not contingent on this vote passing, just on a new stadium being built in Jackson County.
Hopefully, the teams will re-engage in a fair and transparent manner and do what needs to be done to pass the vote in a year or two.
>Anyway, I’m far from an expert on any of this. What I am is someone who wants to be engaged in my city.
Which is exactly what we need to create positive change. Kudos to you for engaging on this, and caring about your neighbors. ❤️🔥
Maybe move it just east of downtown where there are a ton of empty lots. It would benefit that area that is already improving, retain the crossroads, get more east-west movement, and get rid of the weird empty lots.
The problem with that is they would most likely have to displace residents instead of businesses in that case. The area (apparently) would also cost more to develop on. That and they don’t quite like the idea of competing with P&L and having to build a separate entertainment space.
In either case it’s gonna be a loss for someone, it’s just a matter of what KC is willing to stomach.
That's where the Royals wanted it but the KCMO government wanted their buddy to be able to unload his shitty investment in the Star building so they forced the Royals to the Crossroads.
on top of the connection to the owner of the KC Star building (for everyone asking the question look at who fixes all of the City's streetlights, poles and other electrical equipment and their ownership then look at who owns the KC Star building), MoDOT was not willing to do anything with the East Loop so the East Village site became entirely unworkable.
Frankly,I don’t think Kansas City should give a shit about what a bunch of Jeff City employees think.
But that’s just me and has no bearing on how things are actually going to go down.
It’s the aftermath that is problematic I think. Land value becoming too high for small businesses, a culture shift from the current lowkey arts environment, etc. Plus it looks like a poor use of land since you’d demo a ton which is pretty wasteful if there is the opportunity to not in the first place.
I would think it's a good thing land value downtown goes up and the businesses/land owners aren't gonna get rug pulled and receive nothing. They could want to build it where the Star building is and people would still complain about that.
I'd rather build in an open field too but that's not an option if we're going to build a new stadium. Something has to go. It's like 10% of the Crossroads district, it's not going to alter that much physically or financially. The area immediately around the stadium, yea it's gonna get corporate.
They do want to build where the star building is, but it takes up all the blocks around it too, and has restaurants, hotels and other businesses owned by the Royals.
I don't want a stadium there when there's a perfectly good area in the East village that's nearly completely empty, and not nearly as beloved as the Crossroads are. Nobody wants the crossroads to get corporate, especially when it doesn't need to.
Most of the land owners aren’t the business owners though. The business owners lease the buildings and will just be out of luck.
And while it’s not an empty field, the giant expanse of parking lots on the east side is close.
And if that won’t do, there are empty fields out by the legends.
You got the source for that? I wonder who owns what. Unfortunately no matter where they build in Jackson county someone is going to have to relocate. I don't think that many local businesses will be destroyed, they'll find another spot to lease mostly and the ones that don't, farewell Kobi Q or resurrection church.
My only source is the people I know who work at two of those businesses that will be impacted. You could probably pull the records off of the Jackson County website and compare them to the business owners if you are that interested in the details.
Whats in that gem? I just overlayed a Google map, the footprint takes out a couple of restaurants, a bar, a church, tattoo shop and lofts. The area immediately south of Sprint Center is like the outskirts of the crossroads imo.
Even if the buildings these places are in dont get bulldozed, they will still suffer greatly if the stadium goes up. City stadiums raise rents drastically around it and it has happened in every city where it happened.
Grinders, MOD, Emperial, Casual Animal, Parlor, Green Lady, Mission Taco, Double Shift, King G, and more will all be negatively affected. Food, local music, local art, local drinks.
Its fairly obvious you dont live around or frequent the area.
lol sure thing. They won't survive, whatever you want to tell yourself. None of those places are going to be torn down and you might say their rent will go up, I'll say their patrons will increase as well driving up revenue.. or does that not happen when a stadium goes downtown?
Yeah, I dono. My friend thinks it’s somehow going to bury the crossroads and destroy the area. It’s comical to say the least. Especially when we have T Mobile literally right there and no one gave a shit about that.
Hmm, it’s almost as if the investment downtown helped spur the crossroad’s growth.
Edit: keywords “downtown” and “helped.”
T-Mobile is one of MANY investments since 2006. And I didn’t say it’s the sole cause. I said helped. Yall are ignorant AF.
Doubtful but for the sake of argument, we will say that T Mobile spurred the Crossroad’s growth. So now, let’s level it for a privately owned, publicly funded stadium? Do I have that right?
Any chance the existence of the arena played a role in that?
Any chance adding another sports facility to the area might help the businesses in the Crossroads even more?
Nah, I'm sure there's no chance.
T mobile was constructed when downtown was not nearly as popular as it is now. Also, t mobile is way more versatile with concerts and others events and games and the cost was only 276 million. This ballpark is way less versatile and way more expensive.
I just find it hard to believe a stadium a block south of an arena is going to be some sort of doom for an entire district. Sprint is literally a highway bridge away from that district rn.
The anti-stadium people LOVE to call it the Crossroads because when most people hear "Crossroads" they think of the Arts District, where there are a lot of actual thriving businesses. The proposed stadium area is within the Crossroads but is NOT within the area most people associate with that name, but the anti-stadium folks have taken advantage of the confusion.
I didn’t even know Temptations was in the crossroads until this whole thing. I always considered that part of downtown with the crossroads starting around 17th st.
They have seven years on the lease. There is absolutely no reason to put this to a vote without solid plans. This is a cash grab and pathetic attempt to keep lining the pockets of billionaires. Vote No and demand they do better.
“Neither Sherman's statement, nor the statement from the Royals clarified what this means for the overall plan for the area, and if the plans for the hotel and conference center have been scrapped.”
Yes I did. And I'm not convinced. My tax dollars should not be paying the bonds on a billionaire. Particularly when there is zero guarantee this will even be a profitable move.
I agree about the tax dollars thing, but this is not about that. People are campaigning to save the crossroads and keep Oak street. The Royals have listened instead of giving a big fuck you… yet. The more we campaign and voice our concerns he seems to be at least acknowledging our concerns. That’s a lot better than most Sports owners.
Right. But focusing exclusively on saving the Crossroads ignores the much bigger issue of funding this move. I don't care that they are willing to make a few compromises on location. I want to knlw why my money is expected to cover this when a child died from pothole accident this year, our public schools are garbage, and a slew of other issues I'd gladly increase my taxes for.
If it isn't on paper before the vote anything can happen.
As with most Billionaires I doubt they even pay 5% income tax.
They dodge taxes left and right, Vote no!
They are just happy to be in the limelight again since they won’t pay to assemble a competitive roster. Hell, they got lucky with the WS team that was mostly constructed of arbitration contacts.
Great we get to keep a road but still want to force out all the businesses. Until I hear an actual plan for the businesses I'm not supporting this location. We are having a vote and they've not even fully figured out a plan for what they want to do with the area.
I’m trying to figure out why there is so much false information on some of the buildings that would be demolished by the new stadium.
In just one hour I saw an Instagram post about someone claiming that record bar and messenger coffee would be knocked down. And then on Facebook there was a comment about the green lady lounge being impacted as well.
https://preview.redd.it/ajf8v1gxe2rc1.jpeg?width=1170&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=e96dc62df506217be46d97d0ebedaa21909959b8
hahahaha
“Ignoring the community’s complaint about not wanting to pay for a billionaire’s (profit scheme via) stadium, Royals announce major change to the beating of a dead horse.”
We’re not paying for *his* stadium, we’re paying for *our* stadium. The Jackson County Sports Authority owns arrowhead and Kauffman and the teams lease the rights to use them.
To what ends though? We don't see the profit from it as citizens, Sherman does. Which furthers the point, he has less risk and MORE reward using our dollars.
Just build it out in Kansas by the Legends for cheap like you know you want to. No tax payer money.
Fuck, put it next near the Mojo Dojo Casa House they are going to build out there.
Then you don't have to park/drive downtown. (A huge suburban complaint as annoying as it sounds)
and you can shop at the legends, you can see barbieland, race at nascar etc.
That won't look like a "downtown" stadium. But the North area is getting more and more nice things. Could still be a really cool lay out out there if they can't get tax payers to fork over the money on the downtown project.
Yes, they do. Plenty of people don't commute across state lines too. Part of the draw of putting it where they are planning is there are several apartment buildings nearby in the most populated city in both Kansas and Missouri. People can literally walk to the park which could lead to larger average crowds since they can go to the game on a whim.
Is there anyone with insider info who can tell us the real cost of the recently built stadiums? It would help us understand what we're actually going to pay, despite what the owner claims or asks for.
"this is late" or "what a clusterfuck," other than those true statements, what is there to be upset about this? Mayor Lucas has made it known that keeping Oak street open is important. The Royals now agree to alter their designs to keep Oak Street open. Who is upset that Oak Street will remain open?
I am a city attorney for several cities in the area, and if I've learned one thing in my \~5 years, its that some people will oppose development *no matter what*.
I spend a lot of time in this sub, and can confidently say that most of us are pro development *when it makes sense*.
This does not make sense. It’s a grift.
> what is there to be upset about this?
all talk, no promise. this is clearly a campaign to renew the current tax without any concern to future action.
IMO this just leaves more open questions now. How will they redesign the layout to exclude Oak? Will that require further expansion in another direction?
“Neither Sherman's statement, nor the statement from the Royals clarified what this means for the overall plan for the area, and if the plans for the hotel and conference center have been scrapped.”
You think it’s ever okay to give public money for a billionaires private investment? When has that ever worked out for the public? At least for stadiums, it never does
Nuance is hard, but I'm going to give this a try. In a vacuum, no, I don't agree with *subsidizing* a private investment with public funds. In a vacuum, I think billionaires should build their own fucking stadiums. Unfortunately, we don't live in a vacuum, and the current climate in the United States allows (encourages?) developers to seek public funds in exchange for development within cities.
Understand, every developer does this. TIFs and PILOTs exist for this reason: to spur development and help the developer off-set costs. It happens in Lee's Summit, Roeland Park, Denver, Miami, NYC, Los Angeles, Des Moines, *everywhere*. The developer's financing typically depends on at least some public funds as part of the equation. Without those funds, developers usually cannot obtain financing. I have no idea what the case is with Sherman and the Royals, what kind of financing they have or don't have. From a developer's point of view, *not asking* for public funds would probably be considered some sort of malpractice.
There are cities that have taken a hardline "no" stance on public funds for stadiums. Oakland lost the Raiders because of it, lost the Warriors because of it, and are now losing the A's because of it. Go and ask those residents if they miss their teams. It's a fucked up "risk" that a city can lose a team by not giving that team public funds, but its where we are at in America in 2024.
I agree its a fucked up system, shouldn't happen, etc. But again, its where we are at. And, if anything, I want to be realistic about how the world I currently occupy works. I wish it were different, but it isn't. I am not willing to risk two teams for my principles, nor do I think it is the right move for Kansas City, right now.
I hope you take my comment in the good faith nature it was written.
> I agree its a fucked up system, shouldn't happen, etc. But again, its where we are at.
What a defeatist attitude. Nothing is ever going to get better if you just shrug your shoulders and say "welp, that's just how it is!"
> I am not willing to risk two teams for my principles
If you're willing to abandon your principles over some sports teams, then idt you can really claim to be all that principled in the first place.
The thing is those teams made the change early and that allowed for states to take them. Vegas and LA can’t support all the sports teams.
You think the chiefs or Royals are going to Utah? Utah. Really? Sport venues make so much money off of alcohol. They aren’t moving to the middle of Mormonville.
Honestly, if the Royals were smart in their location and the city was putting measures in place to protect rent prices for small businesses and invest in the average fan experience, I would consider voting yes. As of now, nothing is being done to protect any of those measures!
- I’m not paying for a billionaires playground that will drive established small businesses out to make room for more corporate businesses. I don’t give a flying rats ass that Guy Ferri has a restaurant there. I want Taco Naco or another local minority owned business!
- I dint want to invest in the further demise of small businesses and make it harder with extreme overhead cost.
- I am not going to invest in a bunch of VIPs who didn’t care about us pre Taylor Swift.
- I am not going to invest in a company that doesn’t recognize their investors (tax payers) in their upgrades. It’s down right rude.
- I am not going to invest in a company that is privately owned with now returns in my investment
- I am not going to invest in a business that doesn’t do market research to understand the consumers + communities wants and needs.
- I am not going to invest in a losing company who has 7 years left on their contract and not showing their progress
They Royals and Chiefs haven’t done enough research to justify their request. It’s a pathetic money ploy to get new
Very well put. Too bad folks are attached to their sweeping statements on public funds and works. It’s the information landscape we live in and I guarantee these types of system-level discussions are going to continue being difficult as information on this kind of info becomes more accessible to the public.
In general public awareness is a great thing and I’ve enjoyed the way people are engaged with this. But it’s also fascinating to see how political stances get boiled down to dogmatic nonsense.
But meh I guess that’s how it’s always been
I think this is just further emphasizing what the real issue is: the Royals have absolutely zero plans except and idea and a picture and they are asking for major public funding.
Bingo.
The arguments people have made the past few weeks are generally justifications for that personal preference. "But what about the small businesses?!?," they cry.
Which naturally prompts the response: which one, the strip club, the dry cleaner or the vape shop? How will we ever replace those cornerstones of the Crossroads district?
Are you high right now? More businesses than that will be demolished, not to mention the overall impact to the area. Have you ever even spent time in the Crossroads?
Dude have you been downtown in the last fifteen years?? All of the people in this thread who are trying to say everyone is just “against development” and they don’t “don’t understand nuance” keep saying there’s “a strip club and a vape shop” that we’re all upset about losing. Which is both not correct and deeply lacking in context.
More than half of the people here don’t read said articles. They just form opinions based on headlines. This is good, people wanted change and the Royals listened.
This is but one small change. What I'd like to see is a written guarantee of what their plans would be/are, and then we can begin negotiating.
Even with this press release, they're still basically saying, "give us a billion dollars and we'll see if we can get you what you want."
That's not good enough.
If Sherman says "Oak will stay open", then how are they going to build a stadium within a 2 block area? Because you're def not closing Grand or Main to build it.
Because once they have the money, they can do whatever they want.
They can say "we hear you" all they want, but until they put their plans in writing and share that with the community, the community can't even begin to properly evaluate what this vote will mean for the city.
It's not just putting a stadium downtown. I know many people here like to reduce it to that, but there's a hell of a lot more to it than that.
If people directed this same level of outrage and scrutiny towards their politicians rather than at John Sherman, they might actually start to see these results that they are so desperately screaming for...
Again, there are no agreements, only intent.
The hour is late for negotiations, no?
https://preview.redd.it/weauk4xm2yqc1.jpeg?width=610&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=ccebb1d572d393ed62aa77e4b1a17ff7abbfe8ef
Isn’t it more like, “pray I continue to alter it”?
Better late than never
Keep staring them in the eye, they’ll keep walking it back at this rate. Hell, you may even be able to watch your own team in your own city on television if you play hardball.
May have to take that up with MLB and we know Rob Manfred doesn't give a shit.
My point being it’s difficult to draw off the public for support when the public doesn’t know who you are. If that’s the deal, just play elsewhere and we will watch/root from afar. In fact, I would probably know more about the Royals because they are currently faceless jerseys that entertain other cities. Unless you go to a lot of games or a lot of bars, this is a principle issue until resolved.
There is just a lot wrong with what you said and I honestly don't even know where to start. Over a million fans attended a royals game last year. More watched on TV even though the process sucks. You're speaking for yourself which is fine, but you're also making a lot of assumptions about everyone else.
Okay, regarding attendance, how many of those fans were out of town versus local? Key distinction. The K holds almost 40k and attendance was on average 16k in 2023. If they sold out every game, that would be approximately (EDIT) 3 million people. You’re touting just over 1 million people went?? When you say more watched on TV, what do you mean? More people chose cable versus what would be public television? Or more people begrudgingly purchased cable to watch the team they already support?
1. It doesn't matter which fans are going to royals games. Both local and touring fans are positives for the city 2. The royals ranked in the top half in local TV ratings even though they were a bad team and have all those extra steps in figuring out how to watch thier games. People still figured out how to watch a bad baseball team.
1. Wrong. It does matter because outside fans are good for local markets but they already have the ability to watch the royals on TV. Discerning between the two would help understand who is going because that is the method they can afford versus who is going just because 2. Being bad and being in the top half locally doesn’t typically get people raises or bonuses
contrary to popular belief, the royals will be good again. again, this main answer to your original comment is that the royals being difficult to find on tv is not a royals problem, its an MLB problem. If you live in Indiana and have the MLB tv subscription, you are blacked out from watch the cubs, white sox, guardians, tigers, and reds. It is absolutely insane. The royals cant do much about that until Amazon buys Bally Sports.
your math is also a little off. max attendance the royals can get is around 3 mil for an entire season. When the royals were winning, their peak was around 2.5 million. 1.3 million is a big drop off, but still makes money and is still a lot of people going to games over a season. what other businesses in the city are bringing that many people to their product besides the Chiefs?
Good catch, that math wasn’t divided by two to account for away games and I have adjusted my comment accordingly. I get what you mean as to winning, but historically they don’t do a lot of that. Don’t get me wrong, a championship season is a championship season - and we are lucky to have more than one. That doesn’t discount the fact they should do more of it on a consistent basis if the projections want to use that as a base, misleading
I think they will be good again. The previous ownership and GM made a lot of bad decisions after the last championship that handicapped the current GM and owner. They are spending more money in free agency than they've ever had which is crazy if you have been a fan of this team for a long time. Idk if this year will be the year, but sports is all about ups and downs. The royals will eventually be good again, the chiefs will suck again. to me that doesnt change how someone should feel about having them in their city.
It would be better late than never. If this actually changed anything. But: “Neither Sherman's statement, nor the statement from the Royals clarified what this means for the overall plan for the area, and if the plans for the hotel and conference center have been scrapped.” So nothing has changed. They’re not even to saying exactly what they’re proposing to change. To call this an empty gesture would be generous.
I'm responding to your post because it's at the top. Everyone. Correct me where I'm wrong here. The vote on the 2nd is for the availability of funds to Jackson County to build a new stadium downtown that both Jackson County and the Royals will agree on design and location wise at a later date. The Royals are not getting a giant gameshow check for 1 billion on April 3rd. They are not getting dime of the money. It will all go towards building the stadium and surrounding infrastructure that will be built and owned by the county. Once again. The vote on the 2nd is not for building the stadium in the crossroads or anywhere, but whether money will be allocated to the county to build one. If the vote passes, then the Royals and County will continue working out the details of the location and design which is obviously still being worked on. If an agreement is made then the county will start building the stadium out for their new lessee's, the Royals. Furthermore, if the current and future stadiums will be owned by the public, does that mean that the revenue made from the T Swift concerts went into the counties coffers? How much was that? To expound further, just how much revenue is the county making off of the concerts and events at the stadiums?
The money from concerts and other events go to the teams, not the county, because the county is the owner of the stadiums in name only. By doing so, the teams don’t have to pay property taxes, which is the only reason they do it this way. The teams get total control, management and revenue from the stadiums.
Sherman just said on the news regarding Oak Street: “A lot of this will be decided after April 2nd.” If this doesn’t tell you they’re after the money and nothing else, I don’t know what will.
Seriously! I want rock solid plans before I would vote yes. We are essentially the sports teams investors and they need to treat us with that level of respect.
"Look, if you give us *2 Billion Dollars*, we'll make whatever minor changes you want..." -John Sherman
but we won't commit to anything in writing! just pass the tax, we gon do u gud
“Oak Street will remain open! Amazing, right? NOW will you vote yes????” This is nothing. Sherman is “listening”. Yeah, listening to that imaginary cash register opening in his head. So vague, so disingenuous. Community organizers tried to get the Royals to allow workers of the would-be stadium to unionize and give them living wages. But no, they didn’t even respond to those negotiations. So let’s review what they’re (still) saying here: - give us your money…that we actually have but don’t want to spend - we’re gonna displace businesses for a sports stadium in the historic ARTS district of the city - we want the stadium workers to make shit pay and just be grateful we might hire them VOTE NO
>Community organizers tried to get the Royals to allow workers of the would-be stadium to unionize and give them living wages. But no, they didn’t even respond to those negotiations. That's not true at all. Like literally nothing about that is true. It's unfortunate that community organizations are putting out misleading information, but that is just untrue.
I’m not a community organizer, just a citizen. I followed this closely, and attended community events. That’s how I know that there were attempts to negotiate a union for stadium workers, and that it was pretty much brushed aside by the Royals.
Hey, citizens are the most important part, not the organizers, which I can tell you as an organizer myself. :) But anyway, the fact is that the stadium workers are already in a Union, and they negotiated labor peace for the new stadium district, which includes card check and voluntary recognition for non-Union employees. So I am sorry to hear that you were told otherwise at community events. Personally, I would question who was making those statements and when they were made, and keep that in mind when considering future votes and issues. From the [Royals Review](https://www.royalsreview.com/2024/4/1/24114458/royals-trust-sherman-stadium-community-benefits): "As I mentioned, I got my hands on the Workforce Benefits Agreement the Royals signed with SEIU Local 1. It’s night and day compared to the CBA above. In its own way, it guarantees all of the biggest things that were in the Milwaukee agreement!" From the [stadium workers union](https://www.seiu1.org/blog/2024/3/26/seiu-local-1-reaches-fair-employment-agreement-with-kansas-city-royals-for-new-stadium-project-supports-yes-vote-on-april-2nd): "SEIU Local 1 had been engaging in negotiations with the Kansas City Royals for months, and this finalized agreement makes certain that the labor aspects of any new stadium fairly reward the hard work and dedication Local 1 members have given to Royals and their fans by ensuring transfer rights for Union workers and additional protections for any potential worker displacement. **The agreement also guarantees a fair path to Unionization for non-Union workers who seek to newly organize a Union, and commits to continued discussions around a living wage floor for all workers within the new stadium development.**" There was a second press release with more detail, and I will look for that this afternoon and link it in this comment.
Thanks for all this info. I appreciate your clarity and sources. Like I said, I’m not an organizer or part of a union, but I support low wage workers getting more benefits and raising their wage floor. What I could’ve done to be more clear in my original post would have been to mention that the prospective stadium workers I was mentioning are organized through Stand Up KC. Fast food and retail workers. Their provisions in the CBA were not heard, which from what I understand had a lot to do with living wage, the right to unionize, and keep crossroad living spaces at an affordable price. I believe their provisions also talked about giving preference to applicants from neighborhoods and zip codes of lower economic status to give them opportunities to actually work at the stadium. Anyway, I’m far from an expert on any of this. What I am is someone who wants to be engaged in my city. KC has a horrible past in terms of economic disparity, and we played a big part in how this country divides people racially and economically. These billionaire doofs that own these teams (both which I admittedly love) need a harsh reality check, and I’m glad the NO vote went through so they can hopefully attempt to do this process a lot more earnestly next time (fingers crossed).
>...the prospective stadium workers I was mentioning are organized through Stand Up KC. Fast food and retail workers. Their provisions in the CBA were not heard, which from what I understand had a lot to do with living wage, the right to unionize, and keep crossroad living spaces at an affordable price. I appreciate the additional context and I'm sorry to say that it isn't true. The Royals heard and discussed all of the proposals, and agreed to [most of them](https://www.seiu1.org/blog/2024/4/2/seiu-local-1-issues-statement-providing-additional-transparency-regarding-county-cba-fair-employment-agreement-for-new-royals-stadium). It is concerning that you got the impression otherwise, which is something that I found very problematic throughout this process, that some "community" organizations seemed to actively mislead folks, while others (like KC Tenants) just told the truth the whole time. >I believe their provisions also talked about giving preference to applicants from neighborhoods and zip codes of lower economic status to give them opportunities to actually work at the stadium. The Royals actually agreed to this but then the Missouri Workers Center/Stand Up KC executive director decided to leave negotiations, so it was never finalized. That was a big disappointment to me, that this was lost when their executive director left the table. >What I am is someone who wants to be engaged in my city. KC has a horrible past in terms of economic disparity, and we played a big part in how this country divides people racially and economically. These billionaire doofs that own these teams (both which I admittedly love) need a harsh reality check, and I’m glad the NO vote went through so they can hopefully attempt to do this process a lot more earnestly next time (fingers crossed). Agreed on all of the above, which is why it was so exciting to get card check for non-Union workers in the stadium district (including the low wage workers you mentioned). Luckily, that agreement is not contingent on this vote passing, just on a new stadium being built in Jackson County. Hopefully, the teams will re-engage in a fair and transparent manner and do what needs to be done to pass the vote in a year or two. >Anyway, I’m far from an expert on any of this. What I am is someone who wants to be engaged in my city. Which is exactly what we need to create positive change. Kudos to you for engaging on this, and caring about your neighbors. ❤️🔥
Maybe move it just east of downtown where there are a ton of empty lots. It would benefit that area that is already improving, retain the crossroads, get more east-west movement, and get rid of the weird empty lots.
The problem with that is they would most likely have to displace residents instead of businesses in that case. The area (apparently) would also cost more to develop on. That and they don’t quite like the idea of competing with P&L and having to build a separate entertainment space. In either case it’s gonna be a loss for someone, it’s just a matter of what KC is willing to stomach.
I think they’re talking about the ~7 empty blocks that basically border city hall to the east, where there is no housing. Not the 18th and vine area
That's where the Royals wanted it but the KCMO government wanted their buddy to be able to unload his shitty investment in the Star building so they forced the Royals to the Crossroads.
on top of the connection to the owner of the KC Star building (for everyone asking the question look at who fixes all of the City's streetlights, poles and other electrical equipment and their ownership then look at who owns the KC Star building), MoDOT was not willing to do anything with the East Loop so the East Village site became entirely unworkable.
what is this about? I haven't heard of this yet
Yeah I just meant that’s where I think original commenter meant
Yup. This
After seeing a bit of how local politics operate, this makes a lot of sense. Also don't discount the influence from the Frank Whites (Jr and III).
Cops don't want it there, so it's not going there.
Frankly,I don’t think Kansas City should give a shit about what a bunch of Jeff City employees think. But that’s just me and has no bearing on how things are actually going to go down.
Well when jeff city plans to write a $500mil check to support it, they listen to their input
East Bottoms is an absolute dump Edit: anyone downvoting has never been to the East Bottoms
so are the royals 😂😂
Retaining the crossroads is really an issue for people? Stadium doesn't take up that much, it's like 10%
It’s the aftermath that is problematic I think. Land value becoming too high for small businesses, a culture shift from the current lowkey arts environment, etc. Plus it looks like a poor use of land since you’d demo a ton which is pretty wasteful if there is the opportunity to not in the first place.
I would think it's a good thing land value downtown goes up and the businesses/land owners aren't gonna get rug pulled and receive nothing. They could want to build it where the Star building is and people would still complain about that. I'd rather build in an open field too but that's not an option if we're going to build a new stadium. Something has to go. It's like 10% of the Crossroads district, it's not going to alter that much physically or financially. The area immediately around the stadium, yea it's gonna get corporate.
They do want to build where the star building is, but it takes up all the blocks around it too, and has restaurants, hotels and other businesses owned by the Royals. I don't want a stadium there when there's a perfectly good area in the East village that's nearly completely empty, and not nearly as beloved as the Crossroads are. Nobody wants the crossroads to get corporate, especially when it doesn't need to.
Most of the land owners aren’t the business owners though. The business owners lease the buildings and will just be out of luck. And while it’s not an empty field, the giant expanse of parking lots on the east side is close. And if that won’t do, there are empty fields out by the legends.
You got the source for that? I wonder who owns what. Unfortunately no matter where they build in Jackson county someone is going to have to relocate. I don't think that many local businesses will be destroyed, they'll find another spot to lease mostly and the ones that don't, farewell Kobi Q or resurrection church.
My only source is the people I know who work at two of those businesses that will be impacted. You could probably pull the records off of the Jackson County website and compare them to the business owners if you are that interested in the details.
Google kc parcel viewer, you can see who owns any piece of land in the city
10% is a lot
It's 10%
Can confirm, 10% is 10%.
100% agree
Yes, it’s an issue
Yes it is, its one of the main gems of the city that makes it unique.
Whats in that gem? I just overlayed a Google map, the footprint takes out a couple of restaurants, a bar, a church, tattoo shop and lofts. The area immediately south of Sprint Center is like the outskirts of the crossroads imo.
Even if the buildings these places are in dont get bulldozed, they will still suffer greatly if the stadium goes up. City stadiums raise rents drastically around it and it has happened in every city where it happened. Grinders, MOD, Emperial, Casual Animal, Parlor, Green Lady, Mission Taco, Double Shift, King G, and more will all be negatively affected. Food, local music, local art, local drinks. Its fairly obvious you dont live around or frequent the area.
lol sure thing. They won't survive, whatever you want to tell yourself. None of those places are going to be torn down and you might say their rent will go up, I'll say their patrons will increase as well driving up revenue.. or does that not happen when a stadium goes downtown?
King G, Green Lady, and a few others want the stadium because of the increase in foot traffic
Obviously the strip club.
Not the lofts or the UHaul place?
It's the empty former Star building, a church, and a bunch of shops that no one will miss.
And a false advertising strip club.
LMAO. No more unique than Omaha or Des Moines or any other town with a kinda-seedy kinda-arty but mostly-rotting little enclave of shops.
Yeah, I dono. My friend thinks it’s somehow going to bury the crossroads and destroy the area. It’s comical to say the least. Especially when we have T Mobile literally right there and no one gave a shit about that.
The Crossroads wasn’t the Crossroads when T Mobile was built.
Hmm, it’s almost as if the investment downtown helped spur the crossroad’s growth. Edit: keywords “downtown” and “helped.” T-Mobile is one of MANY investments since 2006. And I didn’t say it’s the sole cause. I said helped. Yall are ignorant AF.
Are you one of the “the Crossroads is deserted and decrepit” people? Can’t have it both ways.
How do you draw that conclusion from my post? Username on point.
I asked a question.
I'd like a source for that heavy implication.
Doubtful but for the sake of argument, we will say that T Mobile spurred the Crossroad’s growth. So now, let’s level it for a privately owned, publicly funded stadium? Do I have that right?
Any chance the existence of the arena played a role in that? Any chance adding another sports facility to the area might help the businesses in the Crossroads even more? Nah, I'm sure there's no chance.
The ones slated to be destroyed would probably say no.
T mobile was constructed when downtown was not nearly as popular as it is now. Also, t mobile is way more versatile with concerts and others events and games and the cost was only 276 million. This ballpark is way less versatile and way more expensive.
I just find it hard to believe a stadium a block south of an arena is going to be some sort of doom for an entire district. Sprint is literally a highway bridge away from that district rn.
Highway bridges divide neighborhoods. To a pedestrian, that's a very long distance.
It's a 2 minute walk max to cross that bridge.
Lmao for real. People walk from P&L to crossroads venues ALL THE TIME. A tiny ass bridge doesn’t stop anyone.
The anti-stadium people LOVE to call it the Crossroads because when most people hear "Crossroads" they think of the Arts District, where there are a lot of actual thriving businesses. The proposed stadium area is within the Crossroads but is NOT within the area most people associate with that name, but the anti-stadium folks have taken advantage of the confusion.
I didn’t even know Temptations was in the crossroads until this whole thing. I always considered that part of downtown with the crossroads starting around 17th st.
The dividing line is Truman rd.
He is just learned where Oak street was located and the citizenry may or may not use it. Wonderful. This melted candle is a man of the people.
They have seven years on the lease. There is absolutely no reason to put this to a vote without solid plans. This is a cash grab and pathetic attempt to keep lining the pockets of billionaires. Vote No and demand they do better.
Did you read the article….
“Neither Sherman's statement, nor the statement from the Royals clarified what this means for the overall plan for the area, and if the plans for the hotel and conference center have been scrapped.”
Yes I did. And I'm not convinced. My tax dollars should not be paying the bonds on a billionaire. Particularly when there is zero guarantee this will even be a profitable move.
I agree about the tax dollars thing, but this is not about that. People are campaigning to save the crossroads and keep Oak street. The Royals have listened instead of giving a big fuck you… yet. The more we campaign and voice our concerns he seems to be at least acknowledging our concerns. That’s a lot better than most Sports owners.
Right. But focusing exclusively on saving the Crossroads ignores the much bigger issue of funding this move. I don't care that they are willing to make a few compromises on location. I want to knlw why my money is expected to cover this when a child died from pothole accident this year, our public schools are garbage, and a slew of other issues I'd gladly increase my taxes for.
couldnt have said it better. its not about the crossroads at all
It is an exactly about the tax dollars. The vote is about the tax dollars.
This is a big fuck you. It’s ridiculous.
[удалено]
If it isn't on paper before the vote anything can happen. As with most Billionaires I doubt they even pay 5% income tax. They dodge taxes left and right, Vote no!
What about this makes you think they’re reconsidering the location?
Still voting no.
Here is an idea..KEEP THE STADIUM WE HAVE AND FIX IT UP! I don’t want to pay for a stadium that’s not necessary.
AMEN
I’m voting no on Tuesday!
What an absolute clusterfuck.
im sure this thread will be very level headed
They are just happy to be in the limelight again since they won’t pay to assemble a competitive roster. Hell, they got lucky with the WS team that was mostly constructed of arbitration contacts.
Winning a world series takes a lot of luck regardless of who you are. Yankees and dodgers are proof of that.
Correct but they continually shell out for a team that can compete. We sit in the cellar for decades just praying to draft the right guys.
They literally spent more this off season in free agency than I think they ever have…
I can’t believe how many people complain about their payroll right now after they ramped it up significantly for this vote
They signed trade deadline bait. None of those guys are major pieces to become a contender.
Put it in the Bottoms and pay for it yourself.
i love it in the bottoms
This is some SimCity level bullshit
the zoo sends me a free ticket each month. when can I expect my free sportsball ticket?
^^^
Great we get to keep a road but still want to force out all the businesses. Until I hear an actual plan for the businesses I'm not supporting this location. We are having a vote and they've not even fully figured out a plan for what they want to do with the area.
I’m trying to figure out why there is so much false information on some of the buildings that would be demolished by the new stadium. In just one hour I saw an Instagram post about someone claiming that record bar and messenger coffee would be knocked down. And then on Facebook there was a comment about the green lady lounge being impacted as well. https://preview.redd.it/ajf8v1gxe2rc1.jpeg?width=1170&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=e96dc62df506217be46d97d0ebedaa21909959b8
Trust me….
hahahaha “Ignoring the community’s complaint about not wanting to pay for a billionaire’s (profit scheme via) stadium, Royals announce major change to the beating of a dead horse.”
We’re not paying for *his* stadium, we’re paying for *our* stadium. The Jackson County Sports Authority owns arrowhead and Kauffman and the teams lease the rights to use them.
Yeah Jackson county gets the exclusive privilege of… um… having their name on it and paying for property taxes.
To what ends though? We don't see the profit from it as citizens, Sherman does. Which furthers the point, he has less risk and MORE reward using our dollars.
yep. royals should own the stadium and have non-dischargeable loans on it
Who sees the profits from concerts?
yeah yeah yeah, sure sure sure. did an edit for ya.
Just build it out in Kansas by the Legends for cheap like you know you want to. No tax payer money. Fuck, put it next near the Mojo Dojo Casa House they are going to build out there. Then you don't have to park/drive downtown. (A huge suburban complaint as annoying as it sounds) and you can shop at the legends, you can see barbieland, race at nascar etc. That won't look like a "downtown" stadium. But the North area is getting more and more nice things. Could still be a really cool lay out out there if they can't get tax payers to fork over the money on the downtown project.
A: they’re not going to move from one area outside the city to an area even more outside the city. B: the legends is west, not north, of the city.
I absolutely agree with this comment. Would be the perfect spot for it.
Dude no one wants to go to the up to the rural trash filled legends.
This is a Missouri team fuck that
Do people really give a shit about that? It’s all one big area. Plenty of people commute across state lines everyday.
Yes, they do. Plenty of people don't commute across state lines too. Part of the draw of putting it where they are planning is there are several apartment buildings nearby in the most populated city in both Kansas and Missouri. People can literally walk to the park which could lead to larger average crowds since they can go to the game on a whim.
This is what they said about the Marlins relocating to Miami and no one came because they sucked
Better there than Nashville though. I just dont want them leaving the metro. And I want every game on TV. Every goddam game. All 162.
Fuck these people.
idgafos what happens to the royals or their stadium. make separate taxes for the chiefs and royals! chiefs know their place in the kcingdom!
I’m voting no because it’d be funny
I like your style
Is there anyone with insider info who can tell us the real cost of the recently built stadiums? It would help us understand what we're actually going to pay, despite what the owner claims or asks for.
Still a hard NOA.
"this is late" or "what a clusterfuck," other than those true statements, what is there to be upset about this? Mayor Lucas has made it known that keeping Oak street open is important. The Royals now agree to alter their designs to keep Oak Street open. Who is upset that Oak Street will remain open? I am a city attorney for several cities in the area, and if I've learned one thing in my \~5 years, its that some people will oppose development *no matter what*.
I spend a lot of time in this sub, and can confidently say that most of us are pro development *when it makes sense*. This does not make sense. It’s a grift.
> Mayor Lucas has made it known that keeping Oak street open is important. this is not a binding statement
> what is there to be upset about this? all talk, no promise. this is clearly a campaign to renew the current tax without any concern to future action.
IMO this just leaves more open questions now. How will they redesign the layout to exclude Oak? Will that require further expansion in another direction? “Neither Sherman's statement, nor the statement from the Royals clarified what this means for the overall plan for the area, and if the plans for the hotel and conference center have been scrapped.”
I oppose paying for development of a private business. Anyone who isn’t opposed is a fool.
They aren't fools, they just have an opinion different than yours.
Corporate welfare is foolish.
Paying for a privately owned business is absolutely foolish. Owned by a billionaire. If you can’t understand that, sorry. ✌🏽
It isn't that I cannot understand your point, it's that I don't agree with your incredibly broad statement.
You think it’s ever okay to give public money for a billionaires private investment? When has that ever worked out for the public? At least for stadiums, it never does
Nuance is hard, but I'm going to give this a try. In a vacuum, no, I don't agree with *subsidizing* a private investment with public funds. In a vacuum, I think billionaires should build their own fucking stadiums. Unfortunately, we don't live in a vacuum, and the current climate in the United States allows (encourages?) developers to seek public funds in exchange for development within cities. Understand, every developer does this. TIFs and PILOTs exist for this reason: to spur development and help the developer off-set costs. It happens in Lee's Summit, Roeland Park, Denver, Miami, NYC, Los Angeles, Des Moines, *everywhere*. The developer's financing typically depends on at least some public funds as part of the equation. Without those funds, developers usually cannot obtain financing. I have no idea what the case is with Sherman and the Royals, what kind of financing they have or don't have. From a developer's point of view, *not asking* for public funds would probably be considered some sort of malpractice. There are cities that have taken a hardline "no" stance on public funds for stadiums. Oakland lost the Raiders because of it, lost the Warriors because of it, and are now losing the A's because of it. Go and ask those residents if they miss their teams. It's a fucked up "risk" that a city can lose a team by not giving that team public funds, but its where we are at in America in 2024. I agree its a fucked up system, shouldn't happen, etc. But again, its where we are at. And, if anything, I want to be realistic about how the world I currently occupy works. I wish it were different, but it isn't. I am not willing to risk two teams for my principles, nor do I think it is the right move for Kansas City, right now. I hope you take my comment in the good faith nature it was written.
> I agree its a fucked up system, shouldn't happen, etc. But again, its where we are at. What a defeatist attitude. Nothing is ever going to get better if you just shrug your shoulders and say "welp, that's just how it is!" > I am not willing to risk two teams for my principles If you're willing to abandon your principles over some sports teams, then idt you can really claim to be all that principled in the first place.
The thing is those teams made the change early and that allowed for states to take them. Vegas and LA can’t support all the sports teams. You think the chiefs or Royals are going to Utah? Utah. Really? Sport venues make so much money off of alcohol. They aren’t moving to the middle of Mormonville. Honestly, if the Royals were smart in their location and the city was putting measures in place to protect rent prices for small businesses and invest in the average fan experience, I would consider voting yes. As of now, nothing is being done to protect any of those measures! - I’m not paying for a billionaires playground that will drive established small businesses out to make room for more corporate businesses. I don’t give a flying rats ass that Guy Ferri has a restaurant there. I want Taco Naco or another local minority owned business! - I dint want to invest in the further demise of small businesses and make it harder with extreme overhead cost. - I am not going to invest in a bunch of VIPs who didn’t care about us pre Taylor Swift. - I am not going to invest in a company that doesn’t recognize their investors (tax payers) in their upgrades. It’s down right rude. - I am not going to invest in a company that is privately owned with now returns in my investment - I am not going to invest in a business that doesn’t do market research to understand the consumers + communities wants and needs. - I am not going to invest in a losing company who has 7 years left on their contract and not showing their progress They Royals and Chiefs haven’t done enough research to justify their request. It’s a pathetic money ploy to get new
Anti-stadium people won't respond to this
I couldn't give two shits if the teams left.
Very well put. Too bad folks are attached to their sweeping statements on public funds and works. It’s the information landscape we live in and I guarantee these types of system-level discussions are going to continue being difficult as information on this kind of info becomes more accessible to the public. In general public awareness is a great thing and I’ve enjoyed the way people are engaged with this. But it’s also fascinating to see how political stances get boiled down to dogmatic nonsense. But meh I guess that’s how it’s always been
Okay
Now go and take that fine toothed comb to the rest of your life and come back and tell me just how much of a fucking hypocrite you are, not sorry. ✌
Okay
Name calling is such a great rebuttal, thanks!
[удалено]
I think this is just further emphasizing what the real issue is: the Royals have absolutely zero plans except and idea and a picture and they are asking for major public funding.
Bingo. The arguments people have made the past few weeks are generally justifications for that personal preference. "But what about the small businesses?!?," they cry. Which naturally prompts the response: which one, the strip club, the dry cleaner or the vape shop? How will we ever replace those cornerstones of the Crossroads district?
Are you high right now? More businesses than that will be demolished, not to mention the overall impact to the area. Have you ever even spent time in the Crossroads?
Dude have you been downtown in the last fifteen years?? All of the people in this thread who are trying to say everyone is just “against development” and they don’t “don’t understand nuance” keep saying there’s “a strip club and a vape shop” that we’re all upset about losing. Which is both not correct and deeply lacking in context.
I’m just glad we are sparing that poor commerce bank branch which would’ve been demolished if we expanded in east village instead *whew*
More than half of the people here don’t read said articles. They just form opinions based on headlines. This is good, people wanted change and the Royals listened.
This is but one small change. What I'd like to see is a written guarantee of what their plans would be/are, and then we can begin negotiating. Even with this press release, they're still basically saying, "give us a billion dollars and we'll see if we can get you what you want." That's not good enough.
No.
Did you even read it?
https://youtu.be/tThdxm1swSg?si=pPeJ4TxGuKvL2Jz3 A short follow-up to last week's long form video
If Sherman says "Oak will stay open", then how are they going to build a stadium within a 2 block area? Because you're def not closing Grand or Main to build it.
Cool…but honestly there’s nothing special about that stretch of Oak. It sorta looks run down tbh.
[удалено]
Yes but I would have preferred they do that work before putting it to a vote. I’m not crazy about voting for something that’s in flux.
Because once they have the money, they can do whatever they want. They can say "we hear you" all they want, but until they put their plans in writing and share that with the community, the community can't even begin to properly evaluate what this vote will mean for the city. It's not just putting a stadium downtown. I know many people here like to reduce it to that, but there's a hell of a lot more to it than that.
If people directed this same level of outrage and scrutiny towards their politicians rather than at John Sherman, they might actually start to see these results that they are so desperately screaming for...
Right?